4 ms·
> it doesn't make sense to limit what people can build and operate on their own land for private use. When your "private use" of an land has direct negative im
by neatze 6y ago
> it doesn't make sense to limit what people can build and operate on their own land for private use.
When your "private use" of an land has direct negative impact to land outside of your ownership, it does make a lot of sense.
- a5withtrrs 6y agoI'm sure there are limits to what you can get approval to build. I'd be surprised to see companies get approval to build personal nuclear reactors for example. But I can imagine there's relatively little difficulty in operating solar or wind farms or other renewables in the right places [1] [1]https://www.networkworld.com/article/3233313/first-self-powered-data-center-opens.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/3233313/first-self-powe...
- aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 6y agoAn extreme outlier here would be the Walt Disney Company, which negotiated the legal authority to construct and operate a nuclear plant in Orlando, Florida. https://grist.org/article/disney-worlds-literal-nuclear-option-explained/ https://grist.org/article/disney-worlds-literal-nuclear-opti...
- a5withtrrs 6y agoThat's fascinating and the only example I've ever seen of a private company being given permission to own and operate their own private reactor for power generation. Cool!